I think, for me, the lab today was not very successful. I could not express my intention to the audiences. And the technical problem made the process a bit disorder.

 

Purpose: The purpose of this lab is to materialize the peoples’ relationship and show them as a visible way and to separate both the logical space as well as the physical space. It is still focus on the area of site-specific performance; the goal I want to get is using simple objects to materialize the relationship.

 

Disadvantage: the signifier as the game for children is so strong that my audience could not concentrate on the establishment of the relationship. At the same time, I did not explain the rules, my audience got confused at the beginning. Actually, the outside audience (the participants) can not involved in the performance a lot, they could not feel the transformative space. Also, when the performance began, people can not aware of the audio, because maybe too much information for them (I took the sound of river bank and the sound on the street).

 

Suggestion: I think, the idea of mix people from different culture is good, this reminder me that the environment not only consist of real objects but also the culture background. The language can create a familiar circumstance for us. And put this structure to other site, the city site or the site for some certain community (the different groups of people) which connects to the first suggestion. From this point of view, this installation will become a structure which needs different new relationship to re-generation the content.

 

Not come true: The reason why I use two screens is that I want to put the two people in the logical space they create by themselves, but I can not make the proper size to suit the real people because of the technology. 

Tuan present that ‘performance not only requires but commands its own kind of space” (1982, p236). It described the issue form the aspect of space: the performance have ability to control the space. The space is a vital element in the performance. Generally, there are logical space and physical space in one performance. In this paper I would interpret these two kinds of spaces based on different backgrounds----the theater one and the site-specific one, and how they articulate during the performance. The physical space is defined as the realistic place while the logical one would involved in the notion of consciousness. With the increasing of consciousness and self-consciousness, the space will relatively extend, the event or people have the trend to require more space. Insofar I define the consciousness as the recognizing of culture or surroundings which defined as the links between interior and exterior. Simultaneously, the self-consciousness is based on the process of self-reference, which explains the developing inside the exterior.

The theater background

 From last century, the performances began to move from theater to the out site location. McAuley thinks ‘there has been a significant trend over the past thirty years for performance practitioners to abandon the non-place of the stage and the controlled relationship between stage and auditorium of the traditional theater building, and to locate their performance in other site within the social space of the community’( 2006 p.17).  ‘Amongst the live arts it is probably the theater that has exploited this necessary spatiality in the most fascinating and complex ways over many centuries’ (McAuley, 2006 p.16).

The complicated and multiple layers of requiring of space is the core reason for the existing of theater. During a performance, the non-space provides flexible ways for install consciousness and self-consciousness. On the other hand, this establishment is contemporary and easy to break which also restricted by the duration of time and other element. Consequently, the logical space in the theater is unstable. The less powerful inside relationship progress the extent of site-specific performance. After all, theater practitioners were, thus, already making a major contribution to what I have called the ‘placial turn’ which is perhaps to be expected from an art form that has for centuries been playing so profoundly with own spatiality. (McAuley, 2006 p.17)

The physical space in the theater is permanent the same, as a neutral container or the simple background. The costume and the scenography on the stage are all additional fragments applied for establish these fragile relationships.  

 The site-specific background

 The site-specific performance is a more powerful way for performance compared with which in the theater.

The process of installing relationships is more stable and tent to leave the traces on the site. Gradually, the traces accumulated become the terrain of the site. In the site-specific one, the physical space occupied various figures which form by the combination of event and time happened on this specific location.

Form this point of view, the logical space will form the physical one. According to Pearson and Shanks, performance recontextualises such site: it is the latest occupation of a location at which other occupations-their material traces and histories-are still apparent (2001, p.23). Different from the theater, both the physical and the logical space in a site-specific performance are relativity long-term effect because of the solid background of its historical character. Alternatively, the form of consciousness would have profounder links with the culture or surroundings. In a world, this kind of establishment prefers to exist longer and stronger.

The analysis of space notion of two different kinds of performances will contribute the comprehensive of site-specific performance. Additionally, this paper analyzes the space from the perspective of the process of building consciousness and self-consciousness.  

 

The area of mine is still wide for me. In the first lab I tried to use the people’s relationship to create a virtual space and this virtual space is based on a real vacant one (the TV studio). My aim is to test what effect my audience will receive in the multiple spaces. The result is people will feel the transformation of the space.  After that I focused on how to express the relationships between people in the site-specific performances. There are three categories, of site-specific performance based on the position of site. I want to narrow down my realm in the second and third ones. They focus on the people within the site. And in the interim, I use the pine cameral to change the terrain of the site; the changing is based on the time and the relationship of people and people, people and site. My audiences use the boxes to see the other ones aimed to establish some kind of relationship. The images in the boxes change the inside terrain again. The boxes as a media complete the process of shifting. Consequently, the second lab I prefer to record the change reflected by the change of people’s relationship. I want to broadcast the model and the audience can control the character in the model. And the projector will project the real specific space where the audiences exist; the people will feel they are in the virtual space in the model. I considered have text for people. People can pretend different role and can change the things in the model. And finally, I will record the final position of the model. I will prepare different role, but I still think about hoe to promote it.  

 

In one material:

The trend of the description of relationship of the people has the part of the reason as culture integration. In human geography, the new mobilities paradigm aims ‘at going beyond the imagery of “terrain” as spatially geographical containers for social processes. Connections of social life, it is proposal, are ‘organised through certain nodes.’

There is an interesting viewpoint: in order to adapt to the changing, there are more requires of social place ‘that orchestrate new forms of social life around such nodes’. The so-called vacant space such as stations galleries or even some ‘less privileged spaces’. In these people’s communication maybe use pay-phones, beepers or more recently short-text messaging to organize illicit exchange, meeting political demonstration or underground social gathering. 

Consequently, there are new kind of site, more or less stable, within and through which performance might be enacted-and new kinds of (performative ) relationship within and through which site might (temporally) materialize. This solid the conception of the site is the materialization of relationships beyond the foundation of time.

In another material:

It talks about the three way of the useful analogue for that between performance and site: integration, interruption, and implementation. The first way is about the material on the site. the manipulation of the material in its own right, removing or displacing material-marking, cutting, rearranging-to create sculpture, drawing out the relationships between existing characteristics of site and evidence of human intervention. The second one is employing the non-indigenous, man-made materials to intersect the environment and human activity, to frame or harness natural element. Such as the in Christo’s major works: wrapping in fabric of the Reichstag in Berlin. The third one is that the artist demonstration the awareness of environment, with the environment as ecosystem and depository socio-political realities and not as a blank canvas or an endlessly exploitable resource, involving cleaning, planting remedial work. Image the land not as physical matter but as metaphor or signifier, as concept or historical narrative.

The work for the interim show is about memory and change.

Generally, this work is a system for people to communicate to each other. The box which acts as a pine camera would become the medium to describe the site. I separate the different box as the dot on the site; people through the different installations to see different directions. I use this way to establish the people’s relationships. The first one will see the audience coming to the show space from the main road. For me this is the introduction for the people coming. And the second one will see the first installation and the people coming into the show space. I recommend people go into the show space experience others’ work first and than take the small one to outdoor, it would become some kind of summery of the site, so people will take the small one become the moving dot go through the site, the people located before the other two will see the people with the third box. And the landscape in the small installation I maintain the overview from the top of Google map, I think it quite interesting for people to discover because I considerer the small one will be brighter than the others and more flexible for the audience.

About memory and change: in the installation, the tow dimensions image will project to the three dimensions model. And the model was made based on the sense several ago, the audience can see the change through the inside landscape. Additionally, I add the sound into the box which I collected the sound in my home town. This become the recorder of the memory happed before I come to this space and the ones happened before the show and after the show.

In my opinion, the discovery of a site will express my audience more. For them, the original way is a different but delicate way for people to get information. When people want to understand something they will stay in front of the box for quite a longtime, and the strong images also will change the way the other audience watch the site it self.

The development: I am glad the audiences enjoy the experience. However, there are several points I should improve. 1. The inside model not delicate enough, I should take more time to made them, to make it more expressive. 2 I want to make more communication between audiences, maybe not very complicated dialogs. I still want people can talk in order to change the physical space, even though majority spectators give me the feed back that they got the change of the site based on the sound I put into the installation. 3. The further work will focuses on the communication inner people based on the installation. Of cause, the title is the shifting of space according to relationship of audiences in the site specific performance. 

It is common to see the small model in the shop; however what is the meaning of these micro worlds for contemporary perspective. Despite giving the different demotions, also give people the change to slow down the space and obvious the world surroundings. They express the new sense of being in the world- in a new world, an unsettled and unsetting world, a world in which everything keeps changing at ever-increasing speed. These photos not only give me the imagination of another word but they are overlapping each other: the real word and the created world. The large different of scale generate a world which similar to the fairy tale one, full of magic, accident and theatrical. Isaac Cordal said: ‘I think it is very important to observe what surrounds us and how we can manipulate delicately something to change its meaning.’  

In Julia Fullerton-Batten, differ from other artist, her employ the small sense of the environment and the large size of the bodies, which always are girls. In her works, she related to the theme of teenager girl’s emancipation and the transition from being a girl to becoming a woman and illustrate the fragile state of pubescent pre-teenagers coming to terms with the physical, psychological and emotional change that are happening to them.

This reminds me of the site specific performance. In some of the works, they use the daily life environment; the only different is the scale of the site. And it is the scale that expresses the distinct perspective. I consider the small model used in the pine camera box. Combine this kind of small scale and the real scene will enforce the content in the box.

Today, I had the tutorial with Douglas. We talked about the first lab and the work of interim show.

About the first lab: I think I got considerable good feedback from the classmates. However, the main intention is covered by the affection of the moving screen. My main idea is to transform my audience to multiple spaces. There still have gaps between the intention of mine and the final express from the perspective of my audience. I think the work of interim show has the same problem. This is a big progress for me from the aspect about the right order for design: from the concept to the final work while the before situation is there are final works and then gave them the concept. However the next goal is how to transfer my intention or idea to my audience. During this tutorial I recognize it. The material is that you communicate with you r audiences.  

About the interim show: I think the suggestion Douglas gave me is really reasonable. As a designation basic, I should focus on the artistic aspect, and the site-specific in not just about the terrain but about what really happened at this site. But there still something bothers me:1. Will it too simple for audience to accept, even though the first lab maybe too complicated for audience. 2. The main research area is about the people’s relationships change the physical space however can the pine camera reach this goal? And how to establish connection between people based on these installations? 3. If I use the so-called high tech, what effect I will get through the very physical installation?

The obstructs I get: The first step I will use some model to test my idea. Is it impossible for the physical projection to project on the object?  If I screw a hole for audience will it broke the image projected inside the box?

 

The site-specific performance has long claimed scholarly attention, it remain slippery.

In Pavis’s propose: the site-specific refer to a staging and performance conceived on the basis of a place in the real word (1998). This observation relate to the theatrical fundament. ‘The play-as-event belongs to the space, and makes the space performance as much as it makes actors perform (Wiles 2003, 1)  In this theory, the site as a role to approach the goal of the performance which considered as a passive tool.

Kaye attend to change the role of site, he point that the site-specific performance as ‘articulate exchanges between the work of art and the places in which its meanings are defined.’(2000, 1) here, it express the site as a dynamic role through a durational process. It focuses upon process rather than object, and upon the relationship between an object or event and a position it occupies.

Over past ten years, changes happened in the area of practice both from the form and the content: from fixity to mobility; from architectonic to peripatetic manifestations; from expositional to relational models; ‘from the spectacular re-enactment to the quite intervention, from remedial collaboration to dialogic, open-ended process’ (Doherty, 2004, 1)

Site-specific performance based on and contributed by relationships: historical decumbence, site usage (past and present), found text, objects, action, sound. Furthermore, Dartington artist and academic Sue Palmer comments: it is just not about a place, but the people who normally inhabit and use that place. For it would not exist without them ‘(ibid, 145). From this point of view, the relationship of people in this space constituted the complicity of the presentation of site. The site is described as a structure, so the inside links are the people’s relationship while the outside link as the relations of people and site. The inner relationships will reinforce the inside power of the site. On the contrary, the habitants in the original place will involve in the site more. Additionally, according to Wilie, these relationships do not need to be the fit one or comfortable one. She said: ‘the ‘fit’ may not be a comfortable merging with the resonances of the site but might be a reaction against them’ (ibid, 145). Before, it raises the perspective about dynamic process, so the connection of people and people, people and site not stay still but continue changing. Based on this theory, the site can be a story-teller without invention.

The site itself and the events occurred on the site can be the independent. However, this raises the question why the site specific performance would exist? It can be the explanation of the history or the emphasis of terrain.    For me, the most interesting aspect of the site-specific is not the explanation of or bit change of the structure—the material acknowledge but  should be more deeply describe the inner power of the site which I think is the links of people. Beyond the already existing common relationship and the material recreate the new ones.  

The small lab is for the interim show, I use the reflected paper to reflect the event happened from different directions. At beginning, I want to use mirror, of course it can show the space clearly. However, as a site specific work, this space will be a very annoying space so the image will be disturbed by the event happened within the space. The texture of the paper matches this situation.

The original plan, there are four square installations. But I want to simplify it, I deicide to make three. I combine A and D, put the video in the installation D. c still as the input of the conversation, the audience can not watch, can just hear the voice of the other audience. D will hear the conversation and watch the audience outside but can not involve in the conversation. The audience in front of B will participate in the conversation will saw the inside space. The conversations are created to make different roles for the audience.         

 

Each winter since 2000 trace: has hosted a programme of performance events. Each month an artist is invited to create work in response to the characteristics and qualities of the space and its immediate context. This has included both short-term interventions and longer engagement. Towards 6 pm on a Saturday, a small audience gathers: standing, sitting on the floor, occasionally moving to see better, or to avoid the action, sometimes even remaining outside peering through the glass doors. The remains of the performance stay in the gallery, either as planned installation or informal detritus, for the following month, before being cleared and the wall repainted. Trace of works inscribed on the walls, hacked into the floor, are printed and plastered over but not erased. They become part of the site itself: the blood, the text wrote in pencil. Extreme actions in a domestic setting. the audience gathers in the kitchen, their perception infused with memories of other times, other event in this one place.

 The exhibition space do not have history, the whole performance create a event in a ‘empty’ space, and generate the history of the space. The appearance and disappearance of the logic space rewrite the physical space. The new relationships between people and space, audience and performer build and deconstructed circuit after circuit. And every event has its own content. The duration of time and space will create an event, in the work of interim show; I think I can add the showing of the duration changing of relationships and the physical space. However, the establishing of the connections are little massive in the installation, I am think about how to simplify and emphasize my work. I will test it these days.